This invention relates generally to an invention disclosure management system and, more specifically, to network based methods and systems for gathering, disseminating and managing invention disclosures.
Many companies encourage employees to submit, for consideration by management, information related to innovations that such employees conceive and that are related to company business. Especially in large companies with very active invention disclosure processes, a significant amount of information typically is submitted on a wide variety of innovations.
At least some known invention disclosure processes are paper-based, and a paper form often is provided to innovators to utilize in connection with submitting information related to innovations. The information submitted for each innovation typically includes a description of the innovation, along with some details regarding possible or actual use of the innovation.
The submitted information for each innovation is collected and retained in an invention disclosure file, or docket, and at regularly scheduled intervals, e.g., once per quarter, a cross-functional team meets to review each disclosure and to assign a rating to each disclosure. Since the invention disclosure materials are submitted in paper form, the team members as a group typically review each file during the meeting rather than prior to the meeting at a convenient time. As a result, the cross functional team typically makes a decision with very little time to thoroughly consider all potential aspects of an innovation.
Also, while meeting once per quarter or once per month may be sufficient in long cycle businesses in which innovations have a long useful life, e.g., longer than 5 years, meeting once per quarter or even once per month may not be sufficient in short cycle businesses in which innovations have a shorter useful life, e.g., less than 5 years. Losing even 3 months due to internal administration, e.g., coordinating a docket review meeting with the travel schedules and other commitments of the cross functional team members or in getting a patent application filed, a short cycle business can result in loss of significant value in any resulting patent.
Further, although docket rating systems can vary from company to company, a typical rating system has defined ratings, e.g., rating A, B, C, or D, that correlate to specific actions. For example, for an A rated docket a patent application should be filed on the subject innovation. If a docket is B rated, then additional information should be obtained so that such information can be reviewed at a next docket review meeting. Of course, the rating assigned to each docket typically is heavily based on the knowledge and experience of members of the cross functional team. Even when an innovator submits information relating to the importance of an innovation, such information often is qualitative in nature and sometimes perceived as being less than completely objective.
Moreover, in large companies with multiple locations, paper based systems do not facilitate sharing of information across the locations. For example, if a paper based invention disclosure form is submitted at one location to a designated patent coordinator, it is unlikely that other employees at the other locations will learn about the submitted disclosure unless a formal information exchange process is in place. There certainly can be benefits from sharing information regarding innovations across multiple businesses of a large corporation, e.g., to facilitate an integrated patent application filing strategy.
Methods and systems for submission, rating, and tracking invention disclosures are described herein. In an exemplary embodiment, the method incorporates an invention disclosure template to be used by innovators for submission and scoring of an invention disclosure. The invention disclosure template is configured with multiple assessment levels and includes help messaging and other dynamic help functions. For example, one assessment level exists where business counsel or managers can make entries concerning the value of the invention to the company. In addition, yet another assessment level exists where only intellectual property counsel, inside or outside the company, can make privileged entries or comments regarding the invention. Specifically, the entries and comments can be entered and stored in such as way as to preserve the attorneyxe2x80x94client privilege with respect thereto.
The method disclosed includes the steps of receiving invention disclosure information from a user, for example an innovator or intellectual property counsel, comparing the received invention disclosure information with previously received invention disclosure information, and sorting invention disclosures based on criteria input by a person making the disclosure as well as by multiple reviewers.